A Review of Aerosol Generation Mitigation in International Dental Guidance

IntroductionThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) led to the worldwide closure of dental practices or reduction of dental services. By the end of April 2020, governments and professional organisations were publishing recommendations or guidance for the reopening/restructuring of dental services. The aim of this study was to assess how dental aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) were defined in international dental guidelines, what mitigation processes were advised, and whether they were linked to COVID-19 epidemiology.MethodsElectronic searches of a broad range of databases, along with grey literature searches, without language restriction were conducted up to 13 July 2020. Recommendations for the use of face masks and fallow times with patients without COVID-19 were assessed against the deaths per 1 million population in the included countries and country income level using Pearson Chi-squared statistics.ResultsSixty-three guidance documents were included. Most (98%) indicated that AGPs can be performed with patients without COVID-19 with caveats, including advice to restrict AGPs where possible, with 21% only recommending AGPs for dental emergencies. Face masks were recommended by most documents (94%), with 91% also specifying the use of goggles or face shields. Fallow periods for patients without COVID-19 were mentioned in 48% of documents, ranging from 2 to 180 minutes. There were no significant differences in recommendations for face masks or fallow time in patients without COVID-19 by country death rate (P = .463 and P = .901) or World Bank status (P = .504 and P = .835). Most documents recommended procedural or environmental mitigations such as preprocedural mouthwash (82%) and general ventilation (52%). Few documents provided underpinning evidence for their recommendations.ConclusionsWhile the amount of high-quality direct evidence related to dentistry and COVID-19 remains limited, it is important to be explicit about the considered judgements for recommendations as well as generate new evidence to face this challenge.     

Method’s corner: Allergist’s guide to network meta-analysis

Network meta-analyses (NMAs) simultaneously estimate the effects of multiple possible treatment options for a given clinical presentation. For allergists to benefit optimally from NMAs, they must understand the process and be able to interpret the results. Through a worked example published in Pediatric Allergy and Immunology, we summarize how to identify credible NMAs and interpret them with a focus on recent innovations in the GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). NMAs build on traditional systematic reviews and meta-analyses that consider only direct paired comparisons by including indirect evidence, thus allowing the simultaneous assessment of the relative effect of all pairs of competing alternatives. Our framework informs clinicians of how to identify credible NMAs and address the certainty of the evidence. Trustworthy NMAs fill a critical gap in providing key inferences using direct and indirect evidence to inform clinical decision making when faced with more than two competing courses of treatment options. This document will help allergists to identify trustworthy NMAs to enhance patient care.     

Predictions of genotoxic potential,mode of action,molecular targets,and potency via a tiered multiflow® assay data analysis strategy

The in vitro MultiFlow® DNA Damage Assay multiplexes γH2AX, p53, phospho-histone H3, and polyploidization biomarkers into a single flow cytometric analysis. The current report describes a tiered sequential data analysis strategy based on data generated from exposure of human TK6 cells to a previously described 85 chemical training set and a new pharmaceutical-centric test set (n = 40). In each case, exposure was continuous over a range of closely spaced concentrations, and cell aliquots were removed for analysis following 4 and 24 hr of treatment. The first data analysis step focused on chemicals' genotoxic potential, and for this purpose, we evaluated the performance of a machine learning (ML) ensemble, a rubric that considered fold increases in biomarkers against global evaluation factors (GEFs), and a hybrid strategy that considered ML and GEFs. This first tier further used ML output and/or GEFs to classify genotoxic activity as clastogenic and/or aneugenic. Test set results demonstrated the generalizability of the first tier, with particularly good performance from the ML ensemble: 35/40 (88%) concordance with a priori genotoxicity expectations and 21/24 (88%) agreement with expected mode of action (MoA). A second tier applied unsupervised hierarchical clustering to the biomarker response data, and these analyses were found to group certain chemicals, especially aneugens, according to their molecular targets. Finally, a third tier utilized benchmark dose analyses and MultiFlow biomarker responses to rank genotoxic potency. The relevance of these rankings is supported by the strong agreement found between benchmark dose values derived from MultiFlow biomarkers compared to those generated from parallel in vitro micronucleus analyses. Collectively, the results suggest that a tiered MultiFlow data analysis pipeline is capable of rapidly and effectively identifying genotoxic hazards while providing additional information that is useful for modern risk assessments—MoA, molecular targets, and potency. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 60:513–533, 2019. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Effects of early life adversity on immune function and cognitive performance: results from the ALSPAC cohort

Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology - Early life adversity (ELA) is a significant risk factor for mental health disorders. One hypothesised mechanism by which this occurs is via an...     

Use of colony-stimulating factor primary prophylaxis and incidence of febrile neutropenia from 2010 to 2016: a longitudinal assessment

Background: Guidelines recommend primary prophylactic use of colony-stimulating factor (PP-CSF) when risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) – based on chemotherapy and patient risk factors – is high. Whether and how PP-CSF use may have changed over time (e.g. due to guideline revisions, increasing use of myelosuppressive regimens, controversy regarding inappropriate CSF use), and whether there has been a concomitant change in the incidence of FN, is unknown.

Methods: A retrospective cohort design and data from two US healthcare claims repositories were employed. The study population included patients who had non-metastatic cancer of the breast, colon/rectum, lung or ovaries, or non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), and who received myelosuppressive chemotherapy regimens with an intermediate/high risk for FN. For each patient, the first cycle of the first course was characterized in terms of PP-CSF use and FN episodes. Crude incidence proportions for PP-CSF and FN during the first cycle were estimated by calendar quarter (2010–2016); multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate quarter-specific adjusted mean probabilities of FN by PP-CSF use.

Results: The study population totaled 142,730 patients with breast cancer (61%), colorectal cancer (14%), NHL (11%), ovarian cancer (10%) or lung cancer (5%). PP-CSF use increased from 52% in 1Q2010 to 58% in 4Q2016; pegfilgrastim was the most commonly used agent (>96% across quarters). PP-CSF administration on the same day as chemotherapy ranged from 8 to 11% until 1Q2015, and increased to 64% by 4Q2016. Adjusted incidence proportions for FN in the first chemotherapy cycle ranged from 2.7% (95% CI: 2.3–3.0) to 3.7% (95% CI: 3.1–4.3) among those who did not receive PP-CSF, and was 2.6% (95% CI: 2.5–2.7) across quarters among those who received PP-CSF.

Conclusions: Although the use of PP-CSF is commonplace in current US clinical practice, underutilization in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy regimens with an intermediate/high risk for FN may still be an issue. Use of same-day PP-CSF increased markedly from the end of 2015, although this finding reflects (at least in part) increased uptake of pegfilgrastim delivered via an on-body injector as well as the recent change in clinical practice guidelines. Overall, patients receiving PP-CSF appear to have a lower risk of FN during the first cycle of chemotherapy.     

Interventional radiology in the airway in children

Interventional procedures in the airway can be performed in interventional radiology suites or the operating room, by radiologists or other specialists. The most common therapeutic interventions carried out by radiologists are balloon dilatation, stenting, and the treatment of certain airway fistulas. These operations can be very challenging for anesthetists in terms of planning, airway management, the identification and treatment of procedural complications and postoperative care. In particular, a multidisciplinary approach to decision‐making and planning is important to obtain the best results.